Print Page | Close Window

John Walker Lindh

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Scholarly Pursuits
Forum Name: Intellectual discussions
Forum Discription: Discuss political and philosophical theories, religious beliefs and other academic subjects
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8785
Printed Date: 29-Apr-2024 at 11:06
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: John Walker Lindh
Posted By: arch.buff
Subject: John Walker Lindh
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2006 at 14:47

Ok, I think you guys all remember this fellow back in late 2001 early 2002. Do you feel that his imprisonment was justified? or do you feel other wise?

 "I plead guilty," he said. "I provided my services as a soldier to the Taliban last year from about August to December. In the course of doing so, I carried a rifle and two grenades. I did so knowingly and willingly knowing that it was illegal."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walker_Lindh - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walker_Lindh




Replies:
Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2006 at 15:10
He is a traitor of our country, I believe he should be imprisoned because he is a citizen and he did fight against us.

-------------
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey


Posted By: arch.buff
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2006 at 15:16

He should be under intense probation for the remainder of his life after he is released from prison. Whats to say this lunatic wont fly back to Afghanistan and start jihading  again?



Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2006 at 17:20

If he really wanted to become part of the Taliban he should have renounced US citizenship when he swore allegiance to the Taliban. Someone who holds US citizenship and fights for the other side may be rightly considered a traitor. Be renouncing US citizenship he would no longer be American and the US would no longer have any responsibility to subject him to their justice system or a program for rehabilitation. However, he is a US citizen and must be considered a traitor, he must be sentenced and (if deemed desirable) rehabilitated by US law.



-------------


Posted By: arch.buff
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2006 at 17:24
i guess he thoght he would never be caught? Strange, he doesnt exactly "fit in" even with a beard.


Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2006 at 18:57

Originally posted by arch.buff

i guess he thoght he would never be caught? Strange, he doesnt exactly "fit in" even with a beard.

Probably should have worked on his tan a little more .



-------------


Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2006 at 19:33
Kill him.

-------------
Member of IAEA


Posted By: arch.buff
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2006 at 19:41

nice add on Genghis. The funny thing about your post is I can tell you pretty much summed up everything you thought on the issue with those two words.

leave it to Genghis, always consistent though



Posted By: ill_teknique
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2006 at 02:24
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy

He is a traitor of our country, I believe he should be imprisoned because he is a citizen and he did fight against us.

I would've just exiled him.


-------------


Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2006 at 07:47

Basically I go with Constantine on this. But it^s not too easy to renounce one's citizenship unilaterally.

William Joyce ('Lord Haw-Haw') claimed to be not a British subject when he was broadcasting for the Nazis, but he was nevertheless hanged for treason after the war.

 



-------------


Posted By: Mortaza
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2006 at 08:13
kill him, isnt  this punishment of traitors?


Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2006 at 11:50
There's a lot of parallels here with the case of Thomas Paine who was treated very differently on his return to England after the AWI. Perhaps he should have been strung up the instant he returned.

-------------
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk


Posted By: flyingzone
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2006 at 23:45

Of course he's a traitor and should be punished accordingly.

While I was reading his brief biography, I could not but ask myself, "What drove him to make such bizarre decisions in his life?" (I am not defending his actions and I have no sympathy for him.) Sometimes in life, it just takes us a momentary decision to start digging a hole that, once dug, becomes deeper and deeper that it finally reaches a point of no return.

I am pretty sure quite a few of us have experienced moments in our lives when the boundary between sanity and insanity isn't that clear cut anymore. Thankfully, most of us won't cross over to the "other" side. But John Walker Lindh did.

He's only 25 years old, probably just about the same age as quite a lot of the forumers here.  



-------------


Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2006 at 23:53
Originally posted by flyingzone

Of course he's a traitor and should be punished accordingly.

While I was reading his brief biography, I could not but ask myself, "What drove him to make such bizarre decisions in his life?" (I am not defending his actions and I have no sympathy for him.) Sometimes in life, it just takes us a momentary decision to start digging a hole that, once dug, becomes deeper and deeper that it finally reaches a point of no return.

I am pretty sure quite a few of us have experienced moments in our lives when the boundary between sanity and insanity isn't that clear cut anymore. Thankfully, most of us won't cross over to the "other" side. But John Walker Lindh did.

He's only 25 years old, probably just about the same age as quite a lot of the forumers here.  

That's very true, and a very good question.  I recall that he used to be a really hardcore partier and a big fan of gangster rap and stuff, but eventually rejected it and went to the opposite end of the spectrum by embracing puritanical Islam. 

It would be interesting to read a psychoanalytical analysis of him.



-------------
Member of IAEA


Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2006 at 01:07
When your judging this guy I think two things should be remembered.
Firstly it is impossible to renouce american citizenship. I have some diplomat friends whose mother is american. They never wanted american citizenship and nver took it up, when their father got a posting to america they tried to get visas for ameica, they were told that whether they liked it or not they were american citizens becuase there mother was born in america.

Secondly, America went from primary supporter to arch enemy of the Taliban in less than a month. When he joined the taliban he was supporting US foriegn policy and couldn't therefore be a traitor, America then reversed its stance to the taliban and he may not have even known about the american attack. Once he did it may not have been possible to leave the armed forces of the taliban.

PS: Is that a picture of you Genghis or someone else?


-------------


Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2006 at 07:12

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

When your judging this guy I think two things should be remembered.
Firstly it is impossible to renouce american citizenship. I have some diplomat friends whose mother is american. They never wanted american citizenship and nver took it up, when their father got a posting to america they tried to get visas for ameica, they were told that whether they liked it or not they were american citizens becuase there mother was born in america.

That's not quite true. If they were born outside America, they would be American citizens (like it or not) if

a) a parent was a US Citizen who had resided in America before the childs birth

AND (b) after the birth the baby was taken to a US consulate and a declaration of citizenship sworn out

AND (c) the child spent a certain amount of time living in the US before the age of 18 (I forget exactly how long).

As I understand it, if both parents were US citizens, then (c) is not required.

But I agree that once a citizen it's pretty impossible to opt out again.

There is more information that you would probably care to know about at

http://foia.state.gov/masterdocs/07fam/07m1130.pdf - http://foia.state.gov/masterdocs/07fam/07m1130.pdf

(I'm fairly familiar with this because of  my stepdaughter's situation, and my involvement with the expatriate US community here.)

 



-------------


Posted By: flyingzone
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2006 at 09:04

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Secondly, America went from primary supporter to arch enemy of the Taliban in less than a month. When he joined the taliban he was supporting US foriegn policy and couldn't therefore be a traitor, America then reversed its stance to the taliban and he may not have even known about the american attack. Once he did it may not have been possible to leave the armed forces of the taliban.


That is a very interesting theory. But even so, the personal transformation from a hardcore partier to someone who embraces Islam in its most puritanical form is still "remarkable" in a very bizarre kind of way.

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

PS: Is that a picture of you Genghis or someone else?

Yes, that's Genghis, if I am not mistaken.



-------------


Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2006 at 11:34

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim


Secondly, America went from primary supporter to arch enemy of the Taliban in less than a month. When he joined the taliban he was supporting US foriegn policy and couldn't therefore be a traitor, America then reversed its stance to the taliban and he may not have even known about the american attack. Once he did it may not have been possible to leave the armed forces of the taliban.

PS: Is that a picture of you Genghis or someone else?

We had always had terrible relations with the Taliban, we had supported groups like the Taliban throughout Afghanistan but when the Soviets left and their puppet regime fell, the State Department basically washed their hands of Afghanistan.

Yes, that is a picture of me.



-------------
Member of IAEA


Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2006 at 19:12
Originally posted by Genghis


Originally posted by Omar al Hashim


Secondly, America went from primary supporter to arch enemy of the Taliban in less than a month. When he joined the taliban he was supporting US foriegn policy and couldn't therefore be a traitor, America then reversed its stance to the taliban and he may not have even known about the american attack. Once he did it may not have been possible to leave the armed forces of the taliban.

We had always had terrible relations with the Taliban, we had supported groups like the Taliban throughout Afghanistan but when the Soviets left and their puppet regime fell, the State Department basically washed their hands of Afghanistan.

No, America installed the Taliban in the mid '90s with Pakistani help. The taliban until september 11 thereabouts, were propped up by america. Which means the when John Walker Lindh joined the taliban he was supporting american foriegn policy and wasn't a tratior at all.
Originally posted by flyingzone


That is a very interesting theory. But even so, the personal transformation from a hardcore partier to someone who embraces Islam in its most puritanical form is still "remarkable" in a very bizarre kind of way.

Actually its not bizarre at all. Its quite common. It shows a person who is going to take whatever he does to an extreme. Before he was a muslim he took parting to an extreme, and when he did become a muslim he took not parting to an extreme.


-------------


Posted By: Illuminati
Date Posted: 03-Feb-2006 at 23:32
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Originally posted by Genghis


Originally posted by Omar al Hashim


Secondly, America went from primary supporter to arch enemy of the Taliban in less than a month. When he joined the taliban he was supporting US foriegn policy and couldn't therefore be a traitor, America then reversed its stance to the taliban and he may not have even known about the american attack. Once he did it may not have been possible to leave the armed forces of the taliban.

We had always had terrible relations with the Taliban, we had supported groups like the Taliban throughout Afghanistan but when the Soviets left and their puppet regime fell, the State Department basically washed their hands of Afghanistan.

No, America installed the Taliban in the mid '90s with Pakistani help. The taliban until september 11 thereabouts, were propped up by america. Which means the when John Walker Lindh joined the taliban he was supporting american foriegn policy and wasn't a tratior at all.
Originally posted by flyingzone


That is a very interesting theory. But even so, the personal transformation from a hardcore partier to someone who embraces Islam in its most puritanical form is still "remarkable" in a very bizarre kind of way.

Actually its not bizarre at all. Its quite common. It shows a person who is going to take whatever he does to an extreme. Before he was a muslim he took parting to an extreme, and when he did become a muslim he took not parting to an extreme.


That's pretty much all wrong. America was running missions agaisnt al qaeda in Taliban territory during teh 90's.

Clinton authorized a CIA mission to go in and nab Bin laden in 1998. America wasn't supporting teh Taliban up until sept. 11th.  The US was allied with teh northern Alliance during the late 90's and up until the taliban fell. The Northern alliance aided the CIA numerous times before 9/11. America knew al qaeda was a threat after the failed 1993 WTC attack. If you think America was supporting the taliban past that time while they were harboring al qaeda, you're really lost.




-------------


Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2006 at 01:10
How can you guys not know this? I thought it was common knowledge. America set the taliban up. The countries that had taliban embassies were Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and UAE, all governments with heavy american influence. America funded the taliban, you got them to destroy the poppy crop. American installed them. America used ISI to create the taliban. You hardly cared about "al-qaeda" or bin laden before sept 11. 

-------------


Posted By: Illuminati
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2006 at 02:43
America gave way for the taliban to take power becuase the taliban was rather anti-soviet. Everyone knows that. My point was that the US didn't keep on supporting the taliban like you claimed they did.

You hardly cared about "al-qaeda" or bin laden before sept 11.

Clinton didn't order the CIA to kidnap Bin Laden in 1998 jsut for the hell of it.

and I suppose that America just kept on not caring about bin laden even afer he tried to blow up the WTC in 1993.

I have yet to see one reason why America would not care about al qaeda after 1993. The Communists were all but done for, and no other government could be worse than the taliban. What is the plus side to america continuing to support the taliban? And why would america not care about al qaeda after they tried to level the WTC? Your argument is illogical.




-------------


Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2006 at 03:25
Originally posted by Illuminati


America gave way for the taliban to take power becuase the taliban was rather anti-soviet.

Maybe you didn't realise, I was talking about the Taliban. They didn't exist until 1995. They didn't fight the soviets at all.

The taliban were created by ISI and the CIA to stabilise Afghanistan, I am not sure of why american wanted afghanistan stable but I am dead certain of their involvement in supporting them.

There is one site. Hopefully I can find more.
http://us.altnews.com.au/nuke/print.php?sid=3586

The wtc attack in '93 was before the Taliban even existed.


-------------


Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2006 at 21:28

The Ice Skating Institute supported tha Taliban? Those bastards! Whats the ISI?

Only three countries recognized the Taliban, Pakistan, Unite Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia.

If the US did support them for whatever reason, it would have been because of Pakistan did since the US would prefer a Pakistan supported government rather then a Russian Northern Alliance supported faction. It was a civil war. Omar, the leader of the newly formed faction of the Taliban went to Pakistan in 1994 where they got training and weapons.

I wouldn't say anybody knew how the Taliban would turn out compared to all the other factions. And theres really no evidence of the US supporting the taliban at all. Just speculation.

Besides, we sent a Cruise Missle into Afghanistan in 1998 to destroy a Al Qaida terrorist camp. If we had any form of diplomatic relations with the Taliban, I doubt we would do that.



-------------
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey


Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 01:17
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy


The Ice Skating Institute supported tha Taliban? Those bastards! Whats the ISI?

lol
ISI is the Pakistani Intelligence Agency.
Pakistan the UAE and Saudi Arabia are all governments that are very close to the americans. Funding was passing though the Saudi's to the Taliban, support throught Pakistan etc.
I have read strong evidence that convinced me of this point, but for the life of me just when I need it I can't find it again.


-------------


Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 01:29

The only reason I could think the US government would support them is because another major faction was supported by the Russians and since Pakistan supported the other faction, the Taliban, the US probably gave money to support them.

Other then that I honestly believe the US government wiped their hands of them when they were sure the region was secure and the Russians didn't get their chosen faction in place, thus winning a small war so to speak. If they continued to support them, they were probably doing so to get their hands on Osama for the 1993 attack.

Other then that, their was no real strategic reason to support them. Well, as far as I could see anyways. I'm not sure if I gave the best reasoning, I'd like to think their was a good reason other then dumping money into countries for no apparent reason, example: Israel...



-------------
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey


Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 01:44
Yes, I would agree with most of that.
Pakistan supported the Taliban on US behalf.

Another reason for supporting the Taliban was so they could build that pipeline america wants.  They wanted to secure the country to make it possible, but the taliban wasn't ever providing that much security.

I'm sure there are more reasons too.


-------------


Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 01:47

I didn't know there was a pipeline project, learn something new everyday.

But doesn't the US buy most of it's oil through OPEC in the middle east? How would this work exactly if the pipeline went through?



-------------
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey


Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2006 at 01:58
They want a pipeline so they can transport caspian sea oil through Afghanistan and Pakistan so they don't have to rely on Russia or Iran. Probably also to reduce the dependence on the middle east

They keep having problems but becuase Afghanistan is never stable


-------------



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com